Wimbledon: Final set tie-breaks to be introduced in 2019

John Isner beat Nicolas Mahut in Wimbledon's longest match — John Isner's epic Wimbledon victory over Nicolas Mahut in 2010 is the longest match in Grand Slam history

Tie-breaks will be played at 12-12 in the final set at Wimbledon from next year, the All England Lawn Tennis Club has announced.

It comes after the final set of Kevin Anderson's semi-final with John Isner this year lasted almost three hours.

Afterwards South African Anderson, who eventually won the set 26-24, called for a rethink of the format.

The AELTC said "the time had come" to introduce a tie-break method at "a reasonable point" in a deciding set.

The winner will be the first player or team to reach seven points with an advantage of two or more points.

This year's match between Anderson, 32, and Isner, 33, was the second longest in Wimbledon history.

Isner was also involved in the longest match when the American beat France's Nicolas Mahut 70-68 in the final set of their first-round match in 2010.

"While we know the instances of matches extending deep into the final set are rare, we feel that a tie-break at 12-12 strikes an equitable balance between allowing players ample opportunity to complete the match to advantage, while also providing certainty that the match will reach a conclusion in an acceptable time frame," said AELTC chairman Philip Brook.

It will apply to all Wimbledon events - qualifying, men's, women's, mixed and junior singles and doubles.

Are players in favour?

The AELTC said the decision had been made after reviewing match data from the past 20 Championships and a consultation with players and officials.

The majority of players are happy with the introduction of a final set tie-break, according to AELTC chief executive Richard Lewis.

"There were mixed views but predominantly players favoured the final set tie-break," he told BBC Radio 5 live.

"They recognise that the quality of tennis goes down and players start playing not to lose in a long final set rather than the determination to win, and they recognise it affects the quality of matches in subsequent rounds.

"I think players will play better because they know it will finish at 12-12 in a tie-break and they don't have to save energy.

"And a final set tie-break will be incredibly exciting in its own right."

Lewis added the AELTC did consider not applying the rule in finals matches but ultimately decided "there should be consistency right through the whole event".

Former Wimbledon champion Boris Becker tweeted his support for the new rules

Which marathon final sets would never have happened under the new rules?

Roger Federer celebrates beating Andy Roddick — Federer became the greatest player in Grand Slam history as he beat Andy Roddick in five dramatic sets for a sixth Wimbledon and 15th major title in 2009

Fifteen singles matches - 14 men's and one women's - have gone past 12-12 in the final set at Wimbledon over the past 20 years.

Here are five of the most memorable:

2009 final: Roger Federer v Andy Roddick - Federer won 5-7 7-6 (8-6) 7-6 (7-5) 3-6 16-14
2010 first round: Nicolas Mahut v John Isner - Isner won 6-4 3-6 6-7 (7-9) 7-6 (7-3) 70-68
2012 third round: Marin Cilic v Sam Querrey - Cilic won 7-6 (8-6) 6-4 6-7(2-7) 6-7(3-7) 17-15
2017 fourth round: Rafael Nadal v Gilles Muller - Muller won 6-3 6-4 3-6 4-6 15-13
2018 semi-final: Kevin Anderson v John Isner - Anderson won 7-6 (8-6) 6-7 (5-7) 6-7 (9-11) 6-4 26-24

.view-comments-button-wrapped-component {display: block !important;} .view-comments-button-wrapper {display: none !important;}

Comments

Join the conversation

These comments are now closed.

427 comments

I think the key point to the story is that the final set tie break is being introduced at 12-12 and not the usual 6-6 (as in other majors). Sounds a sensible compromise.
Women - sorry none men play 5 sets, WHAT?????? THAT'S NOT FAIR!!!!!! How dare anyone suggest equal effort for equal pay???

Sexual equality when it suits..... very unfair!!!
No. 8 Weaverspell.
Totally agree - if the situation were reversed there would be an outcry. Equal work, equal pay. The women's final at a Grand Slam can be over in an hour!
Should be no final set tie break in the final as there are no following games to worry about and it allows great finals like nadal federer back in the day
Common sense move. It also weakens the argument for womxn not playing 5 sets.
I suppose it's progress, but it takes away the thrill and anticipation of a gruelling final set. Memories of Gonzalez v Pasarrel in 1969 come to mind. While we're about it, as "feminists" seem to be to the fore recently, can we have true equality at Wimbledon with women playing best of 5 like the men?

I bet we never do.
Wimbledon want to strike an 'equitable balance'? Well how about making women play 5 sets? They get paid the same as the men so why not play the same? Oh but that doesn't fit in with the new feminist definition of 'equality' does it? If it was the other way round...........
When will Wimbledon end the misandrous practice of paying men less than women. Getting the same monetary reimbursement for more work, is getting paid less.
Men's tennis is about fine margins, skill, stamina, mental endurance...

Woman's tennis is about waiting for your opponent to hit it into the net (which inevitably happens after a couple of shots)
I remember the Isner Mahut match well. During the second evening, every bar in London showing the match had crowds gathering around the TV. It didn't feature a top seed or a home grown player. It's hard to imagine a first round match will ever capture the public's imagination to that extent again...
Absolutely agree with 45. below regarding men and women playing out best of 5 sets. If women want equality in pay then it has to be based on playing the same number of sets as men..
The truth is no one could bear 5 sets of ladies tennis. 3 is bad enough!
Can’t help feeling this is more about keeping to the schedule than anything else
Still don't understand why women get paid the same prize money as the men when match times are usually half of the men. If prize money is to be the same then surely they should also be playing five sets?

Longest ever men's match at Wimbledon was 11h 5m. Longest ever women's match was in 1995 which lasted 3h 45m... that's pretty much standard for any men's match going to 5 sets.
@29 alec

"Men's tennis is about fine margins, skill, stamina, mental endurance...

Woman's tennis is about waiting for your opponent to hit it into the net (which inevitably happens after a couple of shots) "

Sorry Alec you forgot to mention the prolonged and exaggerated screaming and grunting by women (in some cases) long after the shot has been played!
A sensible compromise and a good decision.

Now I'd like to see them tackle discrimination against women and strive for equality between the sexes by allowing women to play 5 set matches. Equal pay for equal work I say.
Women are quite capable of running the same distances as men in e.g. the marathon - I don't see them running 3/5 of the distance so why should tennis be different ?
All for the change, now all that needs changing is the women to play the same amount of sets as the men - equality in pay = equality in games and sets played.
Not a bad idea. Can they also make women's matches 5 sets now? It's hard to explain to my daughter the patronising disparity that sees men play 5 sets but women play only 3.
Excellent decision and one that makes perfect sense. Now how about sorting out the stupid inequality of women only playing three sets yet earning the same as men?
!2-12 tiebreak seems Sensible decision and a typical good British compromise. . The winners of these otherwise grossly extended final sets tend to lose their next match as it drains them totally. This then can ruin their next match as a spectacle, and as tennis is an entertainment, you have to look after the paying spectator's interests. it did not help this year's men's final.

Accessibility links